Quality

Milk Alliance: Survey Findings

June 18, 2013 Rebecca Schewe Jean Kayitsinga Casey Odom Alan Coats

Outline
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Key ndings Survey methodology DescripFve staFsFcs Key variables: bivariate ndings Key variables: mulFvariate ndings

Key Findings
AKtude does maLer!
I get concerned if the somaFc cell count of my herd reaches MasFFs is a problem on my farm

Key pracFces:
Use of oxytocin for milk letdown Use internal teat sealant at dry o Use intramammary anFbioFcs at dry o (dry treat) Changing liners more than 5 Fmes per year

Survey Methodology

A Survey of

Mastitis Management on Dairy Farms

Survey Methodology

Herd Size

ProducFon

BTSCC

Milking PracFces

MasFFs Management
Weighted Percent Weighted Use oxytocin for milk letdown Percent Use intramammary antibiotics at dry Weighted off (dry treatment) Percent Weighted Use an internal teat sealant at dry off Percent Weighted Dock tails Percent Weighted Singe hair on the udder Percent Milk mastitis and treated cows in a separate group Never Sometimes Frequently Always N/A n 1,019 439 132 1,025 265 35% 15% 5% 36% 9% n 1,045 1,544 208 71 60 36% 53% 7% 2% 2% n 292 321 135 2,223 3 10% 11% 5% 75% 0% n 1,467 202 62 1,127 63 50% 7% 2% 39% 2% n 2,180 267 65 406 40 74% 9% 2% 14% 1% n 1,879 558 201 239 51 64% 19% 7% 8% 2%

MasFFs Management
Never Sometimes Frequently Always N/A Use vaccines to control coliform Weighted n 1,672 mastitis Percent 57% Use vaccines to control staph aureus Insure strict compliance with milking protocols Insure strict compliance with milking protocols* Clean alleys/gutters after or during each milking Train employees in mastitis protocols Train employees in mastitis protocols* * Only including those with non-family employees. Weighted n 2,188 Percent Weighted n Percent Weighted n Percent Weighted n Percent Weighted n Percent Weighted n Percent 75% 199 7% 28 3% 83 3% 354 13% 58 7% 367 13% 336 12% 387 14% 125 13% 316 11% 379 14% 164 19% 127 4% 62 2% 643 23% 240 26% 378 13% 416 15% 221 25% 722 25% 239 8% 1,431 50% 543 58% 2,107 71% 903 33% 435 50% 82 3% 664 24% 35 1% 92 3% 176 6%

MasFFs Treatment and Diagnosis

Use individual cow SCC to identify infected cows Use conductivity in milk to identify infected cows Culture milk samples from high SCC or conductivity cows Culture milk samples from clinical mastitis cases Culture bulk milk tank samples Keep written or computer treatment records for all cows Treat mastitis cows for the full course of antibiotic doses Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted n n n n n n n n Never Sometimes Frequently Always N/A 552 789 620 898 71 19% 27% 21% 31% 2% 1,622 517 179 243 233 58% 18% 6% 9% 8% 991 1,369 296 155 73 34% 47% 10% 5% 3% 933 1,480 258 168 41 32% 51% 9% 6% 1% 1,753 798 110 127 39 62% 28% 4% 4% 1% 1,042 453 304 1,022 52 36% 16% 11% 36% 2% 281 647 518 1,439 63 10% 22% 18% 49% 2% 547 1,006 431 771 106 19% 35% 15% 27% 4%

Review treatment records before making treatment decisions Percent

MasFFs Treatment and Diagnosis

Use systemic antibiotics to treat clinical mastitis Use intramammary antibiotics to treat clinical mastitis Use antiinflammatory drugs to treat clinical mastitis Use oxytocin to treat clinical mastitis Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted Percent Weighted n n n n n Never Sometimes Frequently Always N/A 718 1,346 309 234 190 26% 48% 11% 8% 7% 418 998 567 849 55 14% 35% 20% 29% 2% 926 1,241 330 224 87 33% 44% 12% 8% 3% 1,428 1,023 225 183 62 49% 35% 8% 6% 2% 1,089 955 406 257 119 39% 34% 191 6% 423 16% 204 23% 14% 170 6% 332 12% 146 17% 9% 4%

Use natural (organic) therapies to treat clinical mastitis Percent Use alcohol pads before intramammary tube infusions Train employees in treatment protocols Train employees in treatment protocols* * Only including those with non-family employees.

Weighted n 187 Percent 6% Weighted n 441 Percent 16% Weighted n 118 Percent 14%

2,339 57 79% 2% 864 655 32% 24% 402 46%

Holding MeeFngs

Signicant Variables (Bivariate)

Decreases BTSCC Gloves worn Post-dip Children Under 16 Milk (with employees) Financial Incentive (with employees) Financial Penalty (all) The entire milking system is evaluated Number of times liners (inflations) are replaced per year*** Q29 Q34 Q55 Q56 Q57 Q38 Q39 Having a Herringbone Parlor Q21 Housing Dry Cows on Fresh Sand Q20 Housing Dry Cows on Fresh Sand and Pasture Q20 Housing Lactating Cows on Fresh Sand Q20 Use oxytocin for milk let down Q42 Use intra-mammary antibiotic at dry off (dry treatment) Q42 Use an internal treat sealant (at dry off) Q42 Low Threshold of Concern for BTSCC Q49 Q26 Increases BTSCC Water Used During Prep Having a Tie Stall Parlor Q21 Having a Robotic Parlor Q21 Housing Dry Cows on Loose housing (straw, sawdust, or shavings) & Pasture Q20 Housing Lactating Cows in Stanchion or Tie Stall Barn Q19 Housing Lactating Cows on Pasture Q19 Bedding Lactating Cows on Platform with straw, sawdust, or shavings Q20 Bedding Lactating Cows in Loose housing (straw, sawdust, or shavings) Q20 Bedding Lactating Cows on Pasture Q20 Mastitis is a problem on my farm Q51

MasFFs Management

AKtude

Mul7ple Regression Models of BTSCC on Selected Characteris7cs

Model 1 Controls only Model 2 SSC acceptable threshold Model 3 Milking pracFces Model 4 MasFFs management Model 5 MasFFs Diagnosis and treatment Model 6 -- Sources of informaFon Model 7 -- AKtudes about masFFs Model 5 Cow environment (bedding and milking faciliFes)

Predictors Male Years on dairy farm White Amish Mennonite Native English speaker

Model 1 Controls only

Standardized Coefficients (Beta) .108 .189** .010 .050 .076 .178* .171 .148 .192 .022 .046 -.112 .056 -.084 -.093 -.218***
0.176

High school or equivalent Some college (include associate degree) Bachelor's degree or beyond < 80% income from dairy farm 80 99% income from dairy farm Non-family employees Children < 16 years help with milking Sole proprietor # of milking cows (log) Michigan R2

Model 2 SCC Acceptable Threshold

Predictors Standardized Coecients (Beta) -.568*** 0.441

Acceptable threshold < 300,000 R2

20

Model 3 Milking Prac7ces

Predictors Udders washed or sprayed with water before milking Gloves won during milking Teats dried before milking Teats disinfected aeer milking (post-dip) Change liners more than 5 7mes/year R2
Note: Responses were 1=Yes; 0=No

Standardized Coecients (Beta) .068 -.031 .011 -.007 -.118* 0.457

21

Model 4 Mas77s Management (Q42)

Predictors
Use oxytocin for milk let down Use intramammary antibiotic at dry off (dry treatment) Use an internal treat sealant (at dry off) R2
Note: Scale ranges from 1=Never to 4=Always

Standardized Coecients (Beta)

-.122* -.223*** -.055 0.520

22

Model 5 Diagnosis and Treatment (Q43)

Predictors
Use individual cow CSS to identify infected cows Culture milk samples from high SCC or conductivity cows Culture bulk tank milk samples R2
Note: Scale ranges from 1=Never to 4=Always

Standardized Coecients (Beta)

.158** -.136* -.112* 0.557

23

Model 6 Sources of Informa7on (Q48)

Predictors
Milk cooperative Farm journals Internet Drug company representatives R2
Note: Scale ranges from 1=Very unimportant to 5=Very important
24

Standardized Coecients (Beta)

.053 .128* -.087 -.118* 0.586

Model 7 AWtudes (Q51)

Predictors
Mastitis is a problem on my farm Milking equipment plays an important role in mastitis problems R2
Note: Scale ranges from 1=Strongly disagree to 5=Strongly agree

Standardized Coecients (Beta)

.150** -.140** 0.617

25

Model 8 Cow Environment

Predictors Standardized Coecients (Beta)
.271*** .120** Stanchion or tie stall & Pasture Loose housing, Outdoor Lot, & Pasture Platform with sawdust, straw, or wood shavings Sand - (Fresh) Other bedding types Employees received a financial or other incentive based on milk quality R2 .183*** .110* .085 .100* -054
26 0.666

Stanchion or tie stall

RecommendaFons
Back the basics AKtudes: lower acceptable threshold PracFces:
Use of oxytocin during milking Use internal teat sealant at dry o Use intramammary anFbioFcs at dry o (dry treat) Changing liners more than 5 Fmes per year

Next Steps
Sub-group analysis Employee pracFces

AKtude
Concern 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 > 500,000 Chi Squared Average BTSCC 97,323 113,812 163,728 199,367 240,372 268,332 301,578 353,819 286,197 317,214 315.8609***

Designed with my Veterinarian

Small Designed with Vet

Medium Large

Total

Yes Percent No Percent Total

732.4 28% 1850 72% 2582

52.29 58% 38.51 42% 90.81

72.31 82% 15.56 18% 87.87

857 1904 2761